Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Aravakarthik Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 15 April, 2026
APHC010176352026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3396]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2567/2026
Between:
1. ARAVAKARTHIK KUMAR, C/O ARAVAPEDABABURAO,AGED
ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO.56-34-3/2,THOTAVEEDHI,
BESIDE YES BANK ATM,GOLLAKANCHARAPALEM,
VISAKHAPATNAM - 530008.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of
Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on regular
bail in Crime No. 28/2026 of Kancharapalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam
District on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and
proper and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. RAJESH MATCHA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2567/2026
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition, under Sections 483 of the BNSS, has been filed
by the Petitioner herein/Accused, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 28/2026
of Kancharapalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 69 and 88 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhitha (for short “BNS”).
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the de facto complainant
and the accused were acquainted since 2024, which subsequently developed
into a love affair. The de facto complainant alleged that the accused, under a
deceitful promise of marriage, induced her to have sexual intercourse,
resulting in her pregnancy. Subsequently, the accused allegedly coerced her
to undergo an abortion at Vaatsalya Hospital, Madhurawada, on 10.01.2025,
misappropriated her gold ornaments, and thereafter refused to marry her.
3. Heard Sri Rajesh Matcha, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused
and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
representing on behalf of the State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent
and has no involvement in the alleged offence. The petitioner has been in
judicial custody since 11.02.2026, and his continued incarceration is wholly
unjustified, especially when no prima facie material exists against him. The
3
statutory period has also expired. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that the petitioner is entitled for his release on statutory bail under
Section 187 of BNSS. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions
that may be imposed by this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner finally
prays to allow the petition by imposing any conditions.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition
and submits that the investigation is not yet completed and material witnesses
are yet to be examined. She would further submit that the Court may pass
appropriate orders by imposing stringent conditions.
6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on
record, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the investigation
has to be completed and charge sheet need to be filed within 60 days from the
date of the judicial custody of the petitioner. In the present case though the
statutory period is expired, no report has been filed by the police completing
the investigation. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to be
released on default bail.
7. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this
Court is inclined to release the petitioner/accused on bail on the following
conditions:
i. The petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for a like
4sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned VII Additional Judicial
Magistrate of First Class Court, Visakhapatnam.
ii. The petitioner/accused shall not directly or indirectly tamper with
evidence nor influence, intimidate, or induce any prosecution witness
or contact the victim through phone or any other means.
iii. The petitioner/accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the
concerned Court. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he
shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the concerned Court.
iv. The petitioner/accused shall not leave the country without the express
permission from the concerned Court.
v. The petitioner/accused shall appear before the Station House Officer
concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Saturday, between 10.00 AM
to 05.00 PM., till filing of charge sheet.
vi. The petitioner/accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when required and cooperate with the investigation.
8. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution
shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.
9. It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for
the purpose of deciding the bail application and they shall not be construed as
opinion on the merits of the Crime.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed.
5
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in
this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
__________________________________________
DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date: 15.04.2026.
Note: Issue CC today,
B/o.
UPS
6
15
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2567/2026
Dt.15.04.2026
Note: Issue CC today,
B/o.
UPS
7
